Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42820226›Full record

ReviewOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2026

Biosecurity governance and on-farm implementation in the European livestock sector: regulatory heterogeneity, assessment tools and evidence gaps - A scoping review.

Nicola Spezia, Alfonso Rosamilia, Cosimo Paladini, Luisa Loli Piccolomini, Fabio Ostanello

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Nicola SpeziaRegione Emilia-Romagna, Settore Organizzazioni di Mercato e Sinergie di Filiera, Viale Della Fiera 8, 40127 Bologna, Italy.
Alfonso RosamiliaIstituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale della Lombardia e dell'Emilia-Romagna, Via Antonio Bianchi 9, 25124 Brescia, Italy.
Cosimo PaladiniLocal Health Unit Authority of Parma, Strada del Quartiere 2/A, 43125 Parma, Italy.
Luisa Loli PiccolominiRegione Emilia-Romagna, Settore Prevenzione Collettiva and Sanità Pubblica, Viale Aldo Moro 21, 40127 Bologna, Italy.
Fabio OstanelloDepartment of Veterinary Medical Sciences, University of Bologna, Via Tolara di Sopra 50, 40064 Ozzano dell'Emilia, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Biosecurity is a cornerstone of infectious disease prevention in livestock production and a key component of the One Health approach. Although Regulation (EU) 2016/429 established a common risk-based framework, its implementation has resulted in substantial regulatory and operational heterogeneity across European countries. This scoping review aimed to map the available evidence on the implementation, assessment, and governance of on-farm biosecurity across Europe. Methods: Following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines, PubMed, Scopus, and ScienceDirect were searched for peer-reviewed studies published between 2016 and 2025. Selected institutional documents identified through reference screening were also included if they contained original evidence or structured information directly relevant to biosecurity implementation. Eligible sources addressed the implementation, assessment, or governance of on-farm biosecurity in European Union or the United Kingdom. Of the 2729 records initially identified, 61 sources met the inclusion criteria. Results: The reviewed literature highlighted substantial heterogeneity in biosecurity assessment approaches, implementation strategies, and governance frameworks across countries and livestock sectors. The included sources were grouped into five predominant categories based on a combination of their primary methodological approach and source type: 22 (36.07%) used checklists or assessment tools, 19 (31.15%) were survey-based, 8 (13.11%) employed qualitative interviews or focus groups, 7 (11.48%) consisted of technical or legislative reports and scientific opinions, and 5 (8.2%) formed a heterogeneous residual category comprising qualitative social research approach, perspective article, conceptual analysys, descriptive policy overview and Expert Knowledge Elicitation process. Although standardized checklists provide valuable benchmarking, their generic design may limit their applicability to heterogeneous production systems, particularly small-scale and mountain farms. The evidence also showed that the adoption of biosecurity measures is influenced by psychosocial and economic factors, indicating that effective implementation requires approaches that extend beyond infrastructure-based assessments. Conclusion: The available evidence supports the development of more pragmatic and context-sensitive approaches to livestock biosecurity. Harmonized minimum requirements, multi-step assessment procedures, and interoperable core datasets could improve comparability across countries while preserving the flexibility needed to accommodate different animal species, production systems, and local epidemiological conditions. Farm veterinarians are well positioned to act as key facilitators within a broader governance network involving farmers, competent authorities, industry organizations, and other supply-chain stakeholders.

Indexed as

BiosecurityMeasuresOne healthRegulatory gaps

Identifiers

PMID42820226
PMCPMC13626755

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.